Kamat ousted; dissenting councillors threaten court action
The dissenting councillors protest during the no-confidence motion.
VASCO
A sharp political showdown unfolded within the BJP ranks at the Mormugao Municipal Council (MMC) on Friday after a no-confidence motion against vice chairperson Ramchandra Kamat was passed amid chaos, objections and allegations of procedural lapses, prompting the councillors supporting Kamat to threaten legal action.
The special meeting convened to consider the motion saw heated arguments, disruptions and a walkout by councillors aligned with the Milind Naik panel, who maintained that the motion itself was technically invalid.
Despite the protests, the motion was carried with 13 councillors voting against Kamat in the 25-member council.
The controversy centred on the no-confidence motion letter, which, according to Kamat’s supporters, was filed in the name of a non-existent councillor.
They argued that the letter mentioned “Ameya Naik”, whereas no councillor by that name exists in the MMC, rendering the entire process invalid. The councillors demanded that the meeting be cancelled and rescheduled after rectifying the error, but the chair went ahead with the proceedings.
Clarifying the issue, councillor Ameya Chopdekar stated during the meeting that he was the one who had moved the motion and that his surname was mistakenly written as Naik instead of Chopdekar. He pointed out that the letter bore his correct signature, and the error was only clerical in nature.
MMC Chairperson Girish Borker decided to proceed with the meeting, following which councillors affiliated with different BJP leaders, including Vasco MLA Krishna Salkar, former MLA Carlos Almeida and Minister Mauvin Godinho, voted in favour of the motion.
Borker later stated that the motion had been passed unanimously by those present, terming the procedure fair and transparent.
Kamat, however, alleged that the move was purely political and driven by pressure from senior leaders. He claimed that several councillors had personally conveyed to him that they were compelled to support the motion.
Maintaining that the vice chairperson has limited powers when a full-fledged chairperson is in place, Kamat said the allegations in the motion were baseless and asserted that the meeting should have been cancelled and reconvened after eight days, as per rules.
Councillors Damodar Naik, Damodar Kaskar, Prajay Mayekar and Leo Rodrigues also backed Kamat and announced plans to approach the court, setting the stage for a legal battle within the council.
Advocate and councillor Kunali Parsekar, supporting Kamat, questioned the legality of the entire process, arguing that an elected chairperson does not have statutory authority to conduct such a meeting and that the motion filed by an “unknown person” should never have been accepted.
